American History Xi is a lousy propaganda piece in the exact style of Soviet agitprop productions a few decades priorii. Much like the Soviet counterparts, it is extremely entertaining, quite iconic, and definitely worth watching.

That apparent contradiction is only skin deep. It so happens that as part of their normal lifecycleiii, socialist regimes suffer of momentaryiv delusions of omnipotence. During that time, and on that basis, they momentarily allow frank depictions of "evil" as they understand it in the mass media they control. Because "evil" as socialists understand it is almost entirely identical to Good as far as Humanity is concerned, the net result of this arrangement is that the good of the "evil" characters shines through, and turns the whole would-be aesop into what art always is, for it's all it can ever be : an argument against socialism and the evils it brings. Soon enough the socialists catch up to this, and spend the remainder of their days trying to close, bolt down and weld shut that faucetv - which is why a film like American History X could never be made today, nor will it be made tomorrow. Not in that language, at any rate.

The very transparent ploy is for Edward Norton, a dedicated socialist propaganda tool, to somehow show the futility of Humanity through the application of an enchanted amulet. Let's try it ourselves!

~ Has anything Edward Norton did
as the dedicated socialist propaganda tool he is
made his life better ? ~

As a young man he was a very talented actor. Has he made any good films, outside of this particular one ? What has he done, with all that talent, with all that time ? Take Angelina Jolie, an exact equivalent period prop. So she's taken out her tits, to be replaced with plastic balloons and so protect her from the perils of the flesh. She supported all sorts of causes, ran a private orphanage for indistinct litter and ? Made any good films ? Did anything whatsoever ? Has anything these people have done made their lives better ?

Yes, yes, I know how it's doublespoken - socialism is not about them making their own lives better. It's all about making "other people's lives" better. Because it's so selfless and "good" and - most importantly! - because it can't be measured. If they dedicated themselves to making their own lives better, there'd be a definitive authority to say when they failed. But if they instead pretend to be all about making "other people's" lives better - well! Should anyone claim they failed they can just change the "other people", can't they! The socialist electorate, always and everywhere ein anderes. That enchanted, imaginary public which supports you (from a safe distance) in your quest as you destroy the little you actually have. For asscience!

But let's leave aside how easy it is to break the zombie's arm off and beat it into a pulp with it. Instead, let us point out that the question is fucking stupid, as it directly reduces to consumerism. I am sure there's a bunch of derps running around throughout Central Asia as we speak asking various tribal chieftains whether "anything they did made their lives better", and offering iPads or whatever the fuck. Nevertheless, life doesn't reduce to this. There's a Maslow Pyramid, yo!

I'm sure this isn't going to be the last piece about how trading your ancestral land for 40 dollars worth of shiny beads is the best possible thing "for all those involved", produced by the people trying to hawk shiny beads. Not that there's anything wrong with that : unintentional self-crits with a sharp blade of irony are pretty much the only export product of the socialist state. Besides, Fairuza Balk is pretty hot in this one.

You know, guy has a sister, to obviously represent "the woman" aka ALL SOCIETY. Which sister-woman-aka-all-society likes the socialist v2.0 much better than the prior, natural man the hero used to be. So then it must be right, right ? Progress and revolution! Bla bla herp derp of that sort, guy's brother worships him, ends up killed by some other guy's kid brother, so you see kids how bad it is to be a man rather than the sort of metrosexual that'd paint his toenails with Davina etc etc qs. [↩]

Such as for instance in the 1950s in the SU, or in the 1990s in the US. Amusingly enough, the Russians got overconfident on the basis of winning the space race ; while the Norteamericanos got overconfident on the basis of the Russians rearranging Europe. Talk about a second hand culture in our distant, irrelevant colonies.

And speaking of second hand culture in our irrelevant colonies : what do you figure the odds of the same people who went around for decades explaining how the Soviet Union collapsed because "we" drew it into a military expense game it couldn't support propose that the mechanics of the United States collapsing being... the azns drawing it into a military expense game it can't support. This is the wonder of projected agency. This is also why projected agency is the certain halmark of second hand cultures lost in the irrelevant margin, those people nobody cares about swimming in those places nobody cares about. [↩]

I saw this in the theatre, in a college town. I think it may even have been screened by the university as part of some series.

I of course didn't see it as propaganda at the time, but reviewing it now I see it painfully clearly. Take some hatefacts, put them in the mouth of, not Goldstein exactly but Goldstein's lieutenant who can be identified with and forgiven for being lead astray, then have the guy's idiot friends spout rightist stupidity, then have the "good," "respectable" authorities spout leftist stupidity, all within the context of an auto-critique.

You are right that this film could not be made today. Too many hatefacts. Too many Molotov-cocktail recipes.

I would not be surprised if they did remake it but with the original ending in order to propagandise to niggers that whitey never changes, no matter how many BLM marches he attends with you, he will revert back to curb stomping nignogs.

Fuck, they're already remaking Batman movies and AHX is almost 20 years old, time to rehash it for a new generation.

The more amusing part is that random kids in college towns are actually entirely ignorant of the very recent history, so much so that they aren't aware the state religion of the other-US was "materialist-dialectic", to the degree that they actually had "social studies" classes in THAT. So much so that "electricity+power of soviets" = ?. So much so that lazy propaganda copywriter hacks can simply import wholesale fifty year old books and nobody'd know the difference, it's that Joseph Smith moment all over again. So much ignorance. And these are college kids, really ? Who'd an alien distinguish them from uneducated peons ?

Soviet consumerism was supposed to be both the answer and a sufficient substitute to "the old ways", principally the Orthodoxy-Imperial alliance. It failed miserably, not when the war caused famine, but later, when peace failed to produce sufficient goods to fill the existential void. Without WW2, sovietism would have failed sooner and for the same reason, they got a brief reprieve because a natural theology decided to spring straight out of German tanks. Natural theologies don't usually last.

@cazalla You're missing the fundamental fact involved in all this : in the US, blacks are a dependant minority that's probably going to get crushed. So no, such propaganda would not be directed at black people - not only for the usual reason (propaganda is ALWAYS directed at the majority) - but also for the very plain reason that groups have cognition even when individuals do not, and the blacks would be too petrified to laugh, as the expression goes.

Moreover, the original film actually has deleted scenes that show the guy reverting as a result of his brother getting killed.

[...] came out. She had been blacklisted, you see, and it didn't sit so well with her. [↩]We've discussed before this strange tendency of actual truth to break through bad socialist ideology and turn the whole [...]

[...] is worth watching for the skillful work of the actors, and for the unintentional self-parody that all propaganda ever is. ———Consider this : So we understand each other : John is some poor and kinda [...]

[...] can scarcely stand comparison to a troop of street urchins in terms of civility. [↩]See American History X for the instructional video (the full version - they cut it out of the dork release version). [...]

[...] by John Frankenheimer, with Marlon Brando, Val Kilmer and that ax-crazy slut from American History X (Fairuza Balk). [↩]No, really, you can't make "a man pig" through "genes", for one thing [...]

[...] middle aged woman you come across. And if she as much as dares to not thank you humbly for it, you curbstomp it. Then and there, teeth on the curb, kick to the back of the head. As the saying goes, Molly [...]

[...] very much a rehash of the ridiculous pinnacle of east German socialism that resulted in the "ein anderes" retort), because were society any fitter who knows what airplanes these marx-engels-zigglers'd [...]

[...] by Visconti to enshrine some of the alt-truths of socialism into art. Just like the other one. Or that other one. Or all others, extant or possible, because socialism is abhorent to nature itself by its very [...]

[...] attempt falls duly flat, exactly in the manner the handiwork of the stupid poor always has and always will. What's left behind is a credible story of nobility recounted from the noble perspective. [...]

[...] while you pretend like you weren't stolen from" into the realm of ideal objects. [↩]Visconti, Kaye, Vicario etcetera etcetera, a lengthy list. [↩]He is entirely correct in observing that women [...]

[...] relies on no earnest examination ever being made. Just as long as you don't look, just as long as you don't weigh anything, just as long as you don't think they can continue to parade around as if important, as if they [...]

[...] sometimes translates into laughter, but not always and not necessarily. For instance, I find the ein anderes comment to be the height of comedy, yet I expect if you even understand it (which is on the face [...]

[...] Moonstruck doesn't have the Arthur Miller / Emile Zola -ian carnality of pressed smegma and liquefied puss that Terms of Endearment unabashedly oozes. It is altogether more Proustian an affair, filthy in a dessicated, crumbly manner ; yet it argues just as convincingly for the obliteration of the entire failed Petri dish. The truth about art is that it always finds it very difficult to elude the truth, whatever be its auctorial intention. [...]

[...] a well pickled Lilian Gish. [↩]More in-depth discussion of how this works can be had over at Consumerism is not the answer, though it will put you to sleep ; or, American History X. [↩]Why did you think women had the vote in Oregon ? [↩]At all historical points [...]

[...] he's going for grace-lite ; a treatment of which is not of any kind of use specifically because consumerism is not the answer, nor could ever be the answer. [↩]This is an excellent way to go about things, incidentally. [...]

[...] the only way it conceivably should -- you can take your socialist nonsense and feed it to whatever ein anderes that'll take it. I'm not. [↩]The strand that eventually yielded "Entreprise Resource [...]

[...] not meaningfully different ; it is true that the "potential truthfulness" of a fundamentally & irretrievably false world image is secreted by the state in one case whereas in the other case the exact same is [...]

[...] into the world (for they do not in fact exist, no more than any figments of the socialism ever existed), oppressed under all the utter nonsensev and gave her a good dose ; upon which she suddenly turned [...]

[...] into the world (for they do not in fact exist, no more than any figments of the socialism ever existed), oppressed under all the utter nonsensevi and gave her a good dose ; upon which she suddenly [...]

[...] a decade ago, and hence) ; and that everyone claiming otherwise is committing the usual socialist fraud. [↩]Which indeed is the case ; they happen in "the US", a different thing altogether. [...]

Add your cents!»

If this is your first comment, it will wait to be approved. This usually takes a few hours. Subsequent comments are not delayed.